May 2003

In the May 7, 2003 edition, Senate
President Doug White discussed Ohio’s budget crisis. He
correctly outlined six steps for balancing a budget.

Governor Taft and the Ohio House of
Representatives have a different idea: Increase spending by
ten percent and then try to figure out a way to pay for it.
They want to impose a so-called “temporary”
one-cent sales tax and provide us with some additional rope
to hang ourselves with at the racetrack. I’m referring to
Video Lottery Terminals (VLTs).

(If VLTs become a reality, I wonder if
the Ohio House factored in additional expenses for the
increased crime and the degradation of families that always
accompanies gambling?)

Senator White also discussed the
positions of competing interests. He mentioned those who
desire state sponsored services versus the taxpayers who are
forced to pay for them.

I’ve met with Senator White. He’s a
good man and I’m confident that he’ll find the right balance
between these two broad groups.

Ohio’s poor are among those that desire
state sponsored services. Let’s explore an idea that could
satisfy their needs without making taxpayers poor.

I expect that Senator White
would probably agree that the sources for helping the poor
should be in the following sequence:

Self

Family

Church

Charitable
organizations such as the multitude of United Way
supported groups

Local
Government (city, township, and/or county)

State
Government

(Note that I
did not mention the Federal Government.)

What if the
state offered income tax credits (similar to the $50/$100
Ohio Political Contribution Credit) in exchange for
donations directly to charitable
organizations such as the multitude of United Way supported
groups?

A wide range
of possibilities exists. The
credit does not necessarily have to be dollar-for-dollar up
to some limit. The benefits
of this proposal are multiple:

The
state cuts spending

The
state cuts taxes (via the credit)

Ohio’s
needy get the needed help

Ohio’s
taxpayers get to choose which organizations to fund (if
any). This one has a psychological impact: I’d
rather know that I’m
making donations that directly help people rather than
sending tax dollars off to the abyss we call government.
Furthermore, donations are voluntary; taxes are not.

Efficiency
will be enhanced because money will flow directly from
the taxpayer to the charitable organization. The state
bureaucracy will be out of the loop therefore minimizing
administrative expenses and the potential for fraud and
abuse. (Note that the state bureaucracy
is one of those groups who want to maximize government
spending.)

I strongly
disagree with Governor Taft and the Ohio House of
Representatives’ decision to
increase state spending and increase taxes. Furthermore,
I detest the idea of having to vote on (VLTs) as if it’s
an either/or proposition. This
is a lose-lose situation for Ohio’s
families.

Does anybody else have any ideas on how
to shift the burden of the poor away from government?